Thursday, January 31, 2013

Petitioner's "Conclusory Opinion" Insufficient to Raise a Prima Facie Case

Excerpts from the Board's Determination follow:

Mr. Tridle’s evidence and contentions.

The assessment indicates that the subject property contains 3.21 acres. The buildings are assessed as being on one acre, and the remaining 2.21 acres are pasture. According to Mr. Tridle, the land portion of the property’s assessment should be reduced from $38,600 to $25,700. Tridle argument.

The improvements are also overvalued. The buildings are vacant and deteriorated. The siding is falling off some of the buildings, the roof areas of several buildings are falling apart, gutters and soffits are deteriorated, doors have fallen off, and there is water damage. Some buildings are falling in completely. The property also suffers from ongoing vandalism. While not relevant to the present appeal, the property has deteriorated even more since the assessment date. Tridle testimony; Pet’r Ex. 5.

Although the subject property is nearly worthless due to the severe deterioration, it might still be salvageable. Mr. Tridle therefore believes that improvement portion of the property’s assessment should be reduced from $29,300 to $24,240. He based that opinion on the work needed to bring the buildings up to acceptable standards. Tridle argument.

Indiana assesses real property based on its true tax value, which the Manual defines as “the market value-in-use of a property for its current use, as reflected by the utility received by the owner or a similar user, from the property.” 2002 REAL PROPERTY ASSESSMENT MANUAL at 2 (incorporated by reference at 50 IAC 2.3-1-2) (2009). A party’s evidence in a tax appeal must be consistent with that standard. See id. For example, a market-value-in-use appraisal prepared according to Uniform Standard of Professional Appraisal Practice (“USPAP”) often will be probative. See id.; Kooshtard Property VI, LLC v. White River Twp. Assessor, 836 N.E.2d 501, 506 n.6 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2005) reh’g den. sub nom. A party may also offer actual construction costs, sales information for the subject or comparable properties, and any other information compiled according to generally acceptable appraisal principles. MANUAL at 5.

Mr. Tridle offered nothing other than his conclusory opinion to support his claim that the subject land was assessed for more than its market value-in-use. He, however, did offer evidence of substantial deterioration in the subject buildings, which likely affected the property’s value. Of course, the property’s assessment already accounts for substantial deterioration. And Mr. Tridle did not offer any probative evidence to quantify the deterioration or to otherwise show that the assessment did not accurately reflect the property’s market value-in-use. He therefore failed to make a prima facie case for reducing the assessment.